In re J. P.
Dated: August 12, 2009
CARR, Judge.
{¶1} Appellant, J.P., appeals the judgment of the Summit County Court of Common Pleas, Juvenile Division. This Court affirms.
I.
{¶2} A complaint was filed in the juvenile court on May 15, 2008, charging J.P. with one count of felonious assault in violation of
{¶3} The juvenile filed a “sentencing” brief prior to disposition. J.P. admitted that the incident was “a direct result of [his] untreated emotional and psychological problems” stemming from long-term abuse prior to his removal from his parents. He requested that the juvenile court
{¶4} The juvenile court conducted a dispositional hearing on October 31, 2008, and took the matter under advisement. On November 13, 2008, the juvenile court issued a dispositional order, committing J.P. to the custody of the Ohio Department of Youth Services (“DYS“) for a minimum term of one year to a maximum term to age twenty-one. The next day, the juvenile moved to stay execution of “sentence” pending the court‘s ruling on a forthcoming motion for reconsideration or appeal. The juvenile court stayed disposition.
{¶5} On December 2, 2008, J.P. filed a motion to reconsider “sentence.” The juvenile court denied the motion for reconsideration on December 8, 2008. J.P. filed a timely appeal, raising one assignment of error for review.
II.
ASSIGNMENT OF ERROR
“THE TRIAL COURT ERRED AS A MATTER OF LAW AND ABUSED IT‘S (sic) DISCRETION, AT THE DISPOSITION HEARING AND MOTION TO RECONSIDER SENTENCE, WHEN IT COMMITTED THE JUVENILE TO THE DEPARTMENT OF YOUTH SERVICES AFTER FINDING HIM DELINQUENT FOR COMMITTING THE CRIME OF FELONIOUS ASSAULT, A FEONY OF THE SECOND DEGREE IF COMMITTED BY AN ADULT, IN VIOLATION OF
O.R.C. 2903.11(A)(1) .”
{¶6} J.P. argues that the trial court erred, first, by committing him to DYS for felonious assault, and, second, by denying his motion to reconsider his disposition. This Court disagrees.
{¶7} The juvenile court‘s dispositional order following an adjudication of delinquency is a final judgment. In re Sekulich (1981), 65 Ohio St.2d 13, 15. The Ohio Rules of Juvenile Procedure offer no authority for a motion for reconsideration after a final judgment in a delinquency case. This Court, within the context of juvenile cases, has recognized that “a motion
{¶8} The Ohio Supreme Court has recognized that “a juvenile court has broad discretion to craft an appropriate disposition for a child adjudicated delinquent.” In re D.S., 111 Ohio St.3d 361, 2006-Ohio-5851, at ¶6.
{¶10} In this case, the juvenile court committed J.P. to DYS after finding that, despite extensive involvement in the court‘s Crossroads program, the juvenile‘s behavior had escalated to the point where he now posed a danger to the community. The juvenile court acknowledged the juvenile‘s need for on-going treatment for mental health issues, but recognized that such services would be available during a commitment to DYS. The juvenile court further noted the violence of the offense and serious injury to the victim. In addition to a commitment to DYS, the court ordered that J.P. pay restitution to the victim.
{¶11} The therapy notes appended to the juvenile‘s dispositional brief indicated that J.P. had been involved in prior criminal activities, including physical assaults on authority figures, vandalism and breaking and entering. School suspensions and expulsions for fighting were noted. In addition, three months before the instant assault, J.P.‘s counselor at Child Guidance & Family Solutions reported recent regression by the juvenile in the absence of structure by the juvenile court. The notes indicated no, to partial, progress by the juvenile in increasing self-responsibility and decreasing inappropriate social behavior.
{¶12} At the dispositional hearing, the State recommended J.P.‘s commitment to DYS based on the juvenile‘s prior acts of violence and out of concern for the safety of the community.
{¶13} The juvenile court had already imposed less restrictive sanctions and services on J.P. for prior incidents. Nevertheless, J.P. displayed an inability to control violent outbursts, evidenced by on-going acts of violence against others. He will be able to continue to receive necessary counseling addressing his mental health issues during a commitment to DYS. Commitment will hold the juvenile accountable for the serious physical harm he inflicted on the victim. Under the circumstances, this Court cannot say that the juvenile court abused its discretion by committing J.P. to the custody of DYS in lieu of imposing a less restrictive disposition. The juvenile‘s sole assignment of error is overruled.
III.
{¶14} J.P.‘s assignment of error is overruled. The judgment of the Summit County Court of Common Pleas, Juvenile Division, is affirmed.
Judgment affirmed.
We order that a special mandate issue out of this Court, directing the Court of Common Pleas, County of Summit, State of Ohio, to carry this judgment into execution. A certified copy of this journal entry shall constitute the mandate, pursuant to App.R. 27.
Immediately upon the filing hereof, this document shall constitute the journal entry of judgment, and it shall be file stamped by the Clerk of the Court of Appeals at which time the period for review shall begin to run. App.R. 22(E). The Clerk of the Court of Appeals is instructed to mail a notice of entry of this judgment to the parties and to make a notation of the mailing in the docket, pursuant to App.R. 30.
Costs taxed to Appellant.
DONNA J. CARR
FOR THE COURT
WHITMORE, J.
DICKINSON, P. J.
CONCUR
APPEARANCES:
PAUL M. GRANT, Attorney at Law, for Appellant.
SHERRI BEVAN WALSH, Prosecuting Attorney, and HEAVEN R. DIMARTINO, Assistant Prosecuting Attorney, for Appellee.